God speaks Skolt Sámi as well. Finnish Orthodox Church as a domain of language use among the Skolt Sámi in Sevettijärvi

(1)

Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education

God Speaks Skolt Sámi as Well

Finnish Orthodox Church as a Domain of Language Use among the Skolt Sámi in Sevettijärvi

—

Lukas Kosner

Master’s thesis in Indigenous Studies submitted in November 2016

(2)

(3)

God Speaks Skolt Sámi as Well

Finnish Orthodox Church as a Domain of Language Use among the Skolt Sámi in Sevettijärvi

A Thesis submitted by:

Lukas Kosner

Master of Philosophy in Indigenous Studies

Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education UiT - The Arctic University of Norway

Fall 2016

Supervised by Åse Mette Johansen

(4)

Cover Page: Sevettijärvi Church dedicated to Saint Triphon. Picture taken by Lukas Kosner

(5)

i

Acknowledgements

When I was a pupil, just as other Czech children, I learned a lot about the Czech National Revival that took place in the Czech lands in 18^th and 19^th century. Its purpose was to revive the Czech language, culture and identity. It was fascinating to learn about it, but at the same time it felt to be in the distant past. Nowadays however, the cultural and language revitalization of many indigenous and language minority groups takes place around the world.

The people that are a part of these processes try to save their culture, identity and language, like in my own country centuries ago. I have met some of these people when doing my fieldwork in Sevettijärvi.

I want to thank all the people that helped me with my project. My special thanks go to all the informants - rather my fellow researchers, as I perceive them. I also want to thank other people that I met during my project that offered me insight, information, inspiration, motivation and even friendship. I am so grateful to you. It was a big honor and pleasure to get to know you and this project would not have happened without you.

I also owe a huge gratitude to Åse Mette Johansen, my great supervisor, for her advice, for her kindness and especially for her endless support.

I want to express my gratitude to the Centre for Sami Studies for the opportunity to study there, to gain knowledge, experiences and the opportunity to make this project happen. I am grateful for your mentoring and financial support, especially for the Focal Point North scholarship. My thanks go to my fellow students as well for these wonderful two years.

I want to thank all the people that helped me with proofreading of English and Finnish texts and the one who translated the abstract from Finnish to Skolt Sámi. Thank you so much, Antti, Tiia, Merja and others!

My huge thanks belong also to my family and to my wonderful Inger Lise for all the support, inspiration and motivation she gave me during this project.

This project is dedicated to all the Skolt Sámi people, to the people of Sevettijärvi, and to all the people who have contributed no matter how much to revive and maintain the Skolt Sámi culture, language and identity.

Jiânnai späʹsseb pukid! Paljon kiitoksia kaikille! Thank you all so much!

(8)

iv

Abstract

This study describes how the Finnish Orthodox Church in Sevettijärvi functions as a domain of language use and furthermore analyses what role the Church has had in the process of the Skolt Sámi language revitalization. Many researchers have expressed the importance of the Orthodox Church in everyday life of Skolt Sámi, however none have focused on the Church in the Skolt Sámi context from a sociolinguistic point of view. This study builds on the theoretical concept of domains of language use developed by Joshua Fishman and examines the Finnish Orthodox Church in Sevettijärvi as a domain of language use.

This thesis shows what factors influence the language choice in this domain, how the domain has developed, and how it has influenced the Skolt Sámi language outside this domain.

Empirically, my study is based on ten semi-structured interviews and participant observation.

I present my data divided into four main parts: religious literature, religious services, religious education, and other communication in the domain of the Orthodox Church (communication between the church and the members through media, between the clergy and parishioners, among parishioners and individual communication with the divine). In this thesis, I argue that the Orthodox Church has supported the Skolt Sámi language and its revitalization. At the same time, I show what hinders the further development of the Skolt Sámi language in this domain and what measures might be taken in order to strengthen the position of the Skolt Sámi language in the future.

Keywords: Skolt Sámi people, Skolt Sámi language, Finnish Orthodox Church, domains of language use, indigenous people, language revitalization, sociology of language and religion

(9)

v

List of maps and figures

Map 1: “Sámi Homeland“ is a legal term in Finland and covers the municipalities of

Enontekiö, Inari, Utsjoki and Sodankylä. ... 4

Map 2: Old Skolt Sámi siidas. ... 5

Map 3: Relocation of Skolt Sámi people to the new areas. ... 7

Map 4: Orthodox dioceses in Finland and parishes of the Diocese of Oulu. ... 13

Figure 1: Language use among the Skolt Sámi (Jefremoff, 2005; Feist, 2010, p. 24). ... 10

Figure 2: Levels of oral and written language proficiency among the Skolt Sámi (Jefremoff, 2005; Feist, 2010, p. 25). ... 11

Figure 3: A taxonomy of factors influencing language maintenance for minority languages developed by Hyltenstam & Stroud (1991, p. 112). ... 27

Figure 4: A taxonomy of the structural variables affecting ethnolinguistic vitality. ... 27

(10)

vi

(11)

1

1. INTRODUCTION

In the new situation in Finland, the language and culture of the Skolt Sámi came under the yoke of a new majority language and culture. The Sámi had relatively few possibilities for preserving their traditional ways of living, e.g. their traditional society could no longer function as it did before. But in the new country the Skolt Sámi could profess their Orthodox faith. It was only the Orthodox Church which kept them together, made it possible for them to meet regularly, made them feel they had a religious and ethnic affinity with each other. The Orthodox religion, which was part and parcel of their history and everyday life while living in their traditional habitation areas, thus appeared to be their own tradition, which they brought with them when emigrating to a new land (Sergejeva, 2000, p. 26).¹

It is estimated that there are about 7,000 languages in the world nowadays (Ethnologue, 2016). However, many linguists expect at least half of the languages to disappear during this century (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006, p. 1). Krauss (1992, p. 7) even believes that 90% of mankind’s languages will die or will be doomed to extinction in the 21^st century.

Nevertheless, for different reasons, interest in language revitalization increases in minority language communities around the world. The Skolt Sámi community is one of these communities.

This Master’s thesis deals with the topic of the Skolt Sámi language situation in Sevettijärvi (in Skolt Sámi Če’vetjäu’rr) in Finland focusing on its development in terms of the language domain² of the Finnish Orthodox Church. The data used in this Master’s thesis was collected especially during my fieldwork in Sevettijärvi in August 2015. The goal of this Master’s thesis is to contribute to a better understanding of the contemporary language situation among Skolt Sámi people in Sevettijärvi by focusing on the dynamics within the Finnish Orthodox Church. Many researchers, such as Linkola (1996), Jefremoff (2005), Lehtola (2004a), Sergejeva (2000), Leo (1995), and Rantakeisu (2015), repeatedly express the importance of the Orthodox Church in everyday life of Skolt Sámi, though none have focused on the Orthodox Church in the Skolt Sámi context from a sociolinguistic point of view.³ I hope that this work will contribute to fill this “gap” and I hope that it will also be beneficial

1 When referring to Jelena Porsanger, neé Sergejeva, I use both names depending which name is used in given publications.

2 The term is explained and discussed in the next chapter. A short definition is to be found in section 2.6.

3 Hudson (1996, p. 4) defines sociolinguistics as “the study of language in relation to society”. Sociology of language, on the other hand, is defined by the same author (Ibid., p.4) as “the study of society in relation to language”. Nevertheless, both of the fields are concerned with the relationship between society and language and they overlap. The differences between these two depend on emphasis.

(12)

2

for the local community to which this Master’s thesis is dedicated. Hopefully, it will find its purpose in the future language revitalization research and efforts in the Skolt Sámi context or other indigenous or minority language communities. Even though the topic of this thesis is narrowly focused, the scope of this thesis does not allow me to discuss all of its complexities.

Therefore, this thesis aims to give a basic overview on the situation and serves as an opener to the discussion of the role Finnish Orthodox Church has in the Skolt Sámi language situation.

This Master’s thesis is multidisciplinary, but my theoretical focus and overall approach to the topic is largely influenced by the fields of sociolinguistics and sociology of language and religion.

This Master’s thesis is structured as follows. In this chapter, I will present the research questions and the sociocultural and historical context of the place and the community where my research was completed. In the second chapter, I describe previous research and relevant theoretical concepts, especially the concept of domains of language use developed by Joshua Fishman (1972a). The third chapter is a presentation of methodology and methods and reflection. In the fourth chapter, I present my data in a fourfold structure: religious literature, religious services, religious education, and other communication in the domain of the Orthodox Church (communication between the church and the members through media, between the clergy and parishioners, among parishioners and individual communication with the divine). These data are subsequently analysed in chapter five.

1.1. Research questions

The main research questions of this project are: 1) What dynamics constitute the Finnish Orthodox Church as a domain of language use in Sevettijärvi? and 2) What historical and contemporary role has the Finnish Orthodox Church in the Skolt Sámi language revitalization and what is the Church’s potential as an instrument of language revitalization?

The first question was deliberately developed broadly in order to cover the complexity of the domain and a wide range of the diverse nexuses of different participants making up the whole domain. More specifically, this involves examining both formal and informal tendencies concerning language use within the Finnish Orthodox Church and the Skolt Sámi community. This study focuses upon how Skolt Sámi language entered the domain of the Finnish Orthodox Church, what led to this decision, and how the Skolt Sámi language has developed in this domain both in oral and written form. This involves topics such as what

(13)

3

religious written sources are available in Skolt Sámi language, what languages are used during religious services, and what language people usually use during spiritual activities etc.

At the same time, I was interested in the question of what factors influence language choice in the domain of the Finnish Orthodox Church.

When a language is used in fewer domains it signifies the lessening the vitality of the language. On the other hand, if a language is used in a higher number of domains, it is a sign of strengthening the language vitality (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006). Also, increased use of a minority language or a non-dominant language within a single domain is a contribution towards the efforts of revitalizing language. Based on this logic and based on the literature about Skolt Sámi and Finnish Orthodox Church and their activities, I presuppose that the Finnish Orthodox Church has been a potential instrument of language revitalization in the broadest sense of the word, thus also in the profane area. Whereas, with the first research question I try to simply examine dynamics working in the domain of the Orthodox Church, the second question is already based on the presumption that the Finnish Orthodox Church has had a certain influence on Skolt Sámi revitalization, and the validity of this presumption will be discussed in later chapters.

1.2. The Skolt Sámi people

The ethnonym Sámi people is a name for indigenous people of Fennoscandia. This name is an endonym (coming from the Sámi word sápmelaš), thus Sámi people call themselves Sámi, unlike the exonym Lapp used by southern neighbours which carries pejorative connotations. It is estimated that in Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia (on the Kola Peninsula), there is a population of between 60,000 and 100,000 Sámi people (Lehtola, 2004a). More than a half of the Sámi population speaks one of the nine still living Sámi languages.

Skolt Sámi is a Sámi language and an ethnic group. The group lives in the territory of three different states – Finland, Norway, and Russia – and constitute approximately 1,000 people. Therefore, many refer to Skolt Sámi as “a minority within minority”. It is estimated that in Finland there are about 600 Skolts and 400 of them live in the traditional Skolt Sámi area: the villages of Sevettijärvi, Nellim, and Keväjärvi (Koltta-alue, n.d.). Many Skolt Sámi people in Finland live outside the Skolt Sámi area.

(14)

4

Map 1: “Sámi Homeland“ is a legal term in Finland and covers the municipalities of Enontekiö, Inari, Utsjoki and Sodankylä.⁴

The name Skolt Sámi (in Finnish kolttasaamelainen, in Norwegian skoltesame) is an exonym which originally also carries a derogatory meaning. However, Skolt Sámi have accepted this name and use it (Linkola, 1996). They call themselves sa’mmlaž, simply meaning Sámi in Skolt Sámi language. It is also worth noting that in Northern Sámi they use the word

“nuortalaš”, literally meaning “Eastern”, as an ethnic name for Skolt Sámi.

The Skolt Sámi traditional living area (see the map below) was located between Neiden (in Skolt Sámi Njauddâm, in Finnish Näätämö, in Norwegian Neiden) and Pechenga area (in Skolt Sámi Peäccam and in Finnish Petsamo) and in Tuloma area (Linkola, 1996).

The impact of history on the development of the Skolt Sámi living area will be discussed later.

4 The map is retrieved from <http://www.helsinki.fi/~sugl_smi/kuvat/Kartat/Hallinto/sapmelassuomas.jpg>.

(15)

5

Map 2: Old Skolt Sámi siidas.⁵

The Skolt Sámi traditionally had two important sources of subsistence – reindeer husbandry and fishing. As Linkola (1996, p. 32) writes, fishing was their primary source of livelihood.

However, due to the events in 20^th century, these livelihoods dramatically declined.

Traditionally, similarly to other Sámi groups, Skolt Sámi people were divided into social entities called siidas (in Skolt Sámi sijdd). They consisted of certain families and kin that practiced their livelihoods through specific councils in their areas (Rantakeisu, 2015). During the wintertime, they lived in common winter villages and in summertime they moved into hunting and fishing areas. The traditional way of living remained longest in Suonjel (in Skolt Sámi Suõʼnnʼjel, in Finnish Suonikylä) (Linkola, 1996). Winter villages functioned as social centres, where village meetings (in Skolt Sámi sijdsobbar or siidsååbbar) were held, and state authorities did their duties., They were also locations for schooling and spiritual life. Skolts traditionally used a village administration model which is still in use. Skolt Sámi people also elect a village representative, or elder (in Finnish luottamusmies or kylänvanhin) for the period of three years. Some of the objectives of the village meetings are to discuss local issues, and prepare statements and proposals for the authorities. Nevertheless, the meetings do not have any judicial power anymore (Rantakeisu, 2015).

The Skolt Sámi culture is very distinctive in comparison to other Sámi cultures. The Skolt Sámi culture has been heavily influenced by the East. For example, Skolt Sámi share similarities with Karelians in folk dance tradition and garment style. Another significant feature of the Skolt Sámi culture is leu’dd – a singing tradition, similar to yoik. Leu’dd is a

5 The map is retrieved from <http://www.samimuseum.fi/saamjiellem/english/historia.html>.

(16)

6

long poetic ballad form (Lehtola, 2004a). Other very distinctive parts of Skolt Sámi culture are language and religion and will be discussed later.

1.3. Recent history of Skolt Sámi people

Since the Middle Ages, Skolt Sámi have been strongly influenced culturally and politically by the East. Historical events and political actions of the Nordic states and Russia have always had a direct and crucial impact on Skolt Sámi lives and their ways of living. For example, new state borders or their closure had huge effects on Skolt Sámi families and Skolt Sámi reindeer herding. Nonetheless, even though history offers many interesting issues, the scope of this Master’s thesis does not allow me to elaborate more. Rather, I will present a short summary of Skolt Sámi history of the 20^th century that is essential for the context of the thesis.

Until 1920, the Pechenga region, a part of Skolt Sámi homeland, belonged to Russia.

As a part the Tartu Peace Treaty in 1920, the Soviet Union ceded this area to Finland meaning the connections between Skolt Sámi families on the Finnish border and those on the Soviet border were cut off. In addition, it also split the Suonjel area, one quarter remained on the Soviet side. This loss of land also meant a loss of a portion of reindeer pastures (Lehtola, 2004a). Such a change had significance in terms of citizenship, family connections, sociocultural change and linguistic change. Russian was no longer needed, but Finnish was required instead (Feist, 2010).

As Lehtola (2004a) mentions, Suonjel area, unlike other Skolt Sámi areas, was protected against agricultural expansion and was planned to be an area for the protection of Skolt Sámi culture and land rights. However, the historical events of the Second World War changed everything and completely devastated Skolt lives.

When the Winter War burst out between Finland and Soviet Union in November 1939, Skolt Sámi had to be evacuated. Even though they could return to their homes by the spring of 1940, in 1944 at the end of the Continuation War, they had to leave their homes again and this time, it was forever. After the war, Finland ceded the Pechenga region to the Soviet Union (Linkola, 1996). This time, the Skolt Sámi evacuated deep into Finnish territory, into central Ostrobothnia in Western Finland, in the middle of Finnish culture. This historical period was an important landmark for the development of Sámi identity. Lehtola (2004b; Rantakeisu, 2015) even writes that one cannot understand modern Sámi culture without an understanding of the impact of evacuee times. Skolt Sámi people had to stay in Western Finland under

(17)

7

difficult circumstances until 1945, some until 1946 (Petsamosta Inariin, n.d.). Even though traditional Skolt Sámi lifestyle had begun to break down before the war, historical events during the Second World War accelerated this cultural transformation. Younger Skolts have already adopted the Finnish lifestyle and many Skolt Sámi fought together with Finnish men against Soviets. While at first, many people, and especially the older generation, wanted to come back to their homes, the younger generation did not want to become Soviet citizens. In order to maintain the unity of the Skolt Sámi community, the older generation decided to stay in Finland (Linkola, 1996; Rantakeisu 2015). Remaining Skolt Sámi families in the Soviet Union were resettled and concentrated far from the border in the interior parts of Kola Peninsula (Lehtola, 2004a).

After a four-year process of planning (Lehtola, 2004), Skolt Sámi who had formerly lived in Pechenga found a new home in Nellim, and those originally from Paatsjoki moved to Keväjärvi, while Skolts from Suonjel moved to Sevettijärvi-Näätämö area (see the map below). The last families moved in 1949, when the borders were closed permanently (Kolttasaamelaiset, n.d.).

Map 3: Relocation of Skolt Sámi people to the new areas.⁶

6 The map is retrieved from <http://www.samimuseum.fi/saamjiellem/tietokuvat/kolttien_muutto_iso.jpg>.

(18)

8

Unfortunately, after the relocation to the new areas, the connections to traditional homeland were lost, as was the traditional way of living. In addition, the Finnish government implemented assimilation policies in order to incorporate Skolt Sámi into the Finnish society, resulting in many traumas (Rantakeisu, 2015). One of the main instruments of these policies was education. Children did not have the opportunity to learn Skolt Sámi language up until the 1970’s and in addition, the language was forbidden at school. Skolt Sámi pupils were bullied and as a result, they often hid their own identity in order to cope with the situation (Lehtola, 2004a). About 80% of the children lived in boarding schools coming home just on weekends and during holidays. Therefore, most of the time these children were under the influence of the dominant Finnish culture (Linkola, 1996). The generation born in the 1950’s and 1960’s was left with the biggest trauma and scars to their identity (Rantakeisu, 2015).

This was especially damaging for young people who were exposed to negative attitudes not only from Finns, but also from other Sámi (Lehtola, 2004a).

The Skolt Sámi culture and language has begun to revive little by little from the 1970’s and 1980’s onward. In the 1970’s a Skolt Sámi orthography was created and in 1972, the first ABC book was written and the language started to be taught at school in Sevettijärvi (Kirjakielen kehityksestä, n.d.). In 1980’s the first Skolt Sámi radio program was available and later on the language began to appear in TV-programs (Koltansaamen kielestä, n.d.).

Skolt Sámi literature began to be published and leu’dd, the story tradition, and other Skolt Sámi cultural traditions began to revive. Together with growing self-awareness, and greater tolerances of the Finnish state towards minority cultures and languages have contributed to the Skolt Sámi cultural and language revitalization (Rantakeisu, 2015, p. 93).

Nowadays, Skolts have much better possibilities to get education even in their own language. Since 1993, a Skolt Sámi language nest experiment has been implemented which helps to teach the language to the youngest generation (Lehtola, 2004a). Sadly, the local society has struggled a long time with unemployment in the Skolt Sámi area. Therefore, a lot of people decided to move down south to the big cities such as Rovaniemi, Oulu or Helsinki.

Usually, it is the young people that move down south for better job opportunities (Linkola, 1996).

(19)

9 1.4. Skolt Sámi language in Sevettijärvi

Sevettijärvi-Näätämo is located in the municipality of Inari and is inhabited by approximately 250 people (Tilastotietoa Inarin kunnasta, n.d.). Sevettijärvi was founded in 1949 by fifty-one Skolt Sámi families (Lehtola, 2004a) and is a cultural centre of Skolt Sámi in Finland. The vast majority of the local population speaks Skolt Sámi. Sevettijärvi is very much characterized by Skolt Sámi and Orthodox culture and traditions and it is the only place in the world where the unique Skolt Sámi culture, language and traditions have persisted.

Skolt Sámi (in Skolt Sámi sää’mǩiõll) language belongs to the Finno-Ugric branch of the Uralic language family. Sámi languages are divided into Western Sámi languages and Eastern Sámi languages. Skolt Sámi belongs to the Eastern Sámi language group together with Inari Sámi, Kildin Sámi, and Ter Sámi (Feist, 2010).

It is recognized that Skolt Sámi has four dialects, two belonging to the northern group and two to the southern group. The northern group consists of the Neiden dialect which is extinct and the Paatsjoki (in Skolt Sámi Paaččjokk) dialect, the southern group consists of Suonjel and Notozero-Girvasozero (in Skolt Sámi Njuõ’ttjäu’rr) dialects (Sammallahti, 1998).

This Skolt Sámi orthography created in the 1970’s is based on the Suonjel dialect and is used as the standard dialect (Feist, 2010).

It is estimated that out of 600 Skolt Sámi living in Finland, 250-300 speak Skolt Sámi (Koltansaamen kielestä, n.d.) and according to one of my informants, around 100 people are able to read Skolt Sámi language (Tanja, 2015). According to Jefremoff’s findings (2005), 90% of the local population in Sevettijärvi is able to speak Skolt Sámi language. Jefremoff (2005) also shows that Skolt Sámi is usually used in families and with other relatives and neighbors. Quite interesting generational differences in the knowledge of the languages discussed later in the thesis, are summarized by Feist (2010):

A large proportion of the older generation are unable to write in Skolt Saami because the orthography was only developed in the late 1970s. Younger speakers, on the other hand, who learnt the language at school, are likely to have a much better understanding of the writing system, while simultaneously having a much worse grasp of speaking the language (Feist, 2010, p. 24).

(20)

10

More about the context of language use and the language proficiency of the Skolt Sámi population is illustrated below in the figures referring to Jefremoff’s findings (2005) and presented in Feist (2010, pp. 24-25).

Figure 1: Language use among the Skolt Sámi (Jefremoff, 2005; Feist, 2010, p. 24).

(21)

11

Figure 2: Levels of oral and written language proficiency among the Skolt Sámi (Jefremoff, 2005; Feist, 2010, p. 25).

This brief overview of the sociolinguistic situation and some statistics clearly show the language is spoken especially in informal settings, in families and among friends. The language is consequently used in a much lesser degree in formal settings, such as in business relations and also in the church (Moshnikoff & Moshnikoff, 2006). UNESCO classifies the language as severely endangered on the scale vulnerable – definitely endangered – severely endangered – critically endangered – extinct (UNESCO Interactive Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger, n.d.). Even though education in the language and literature and other possibilities for strengthening of the language have increased considerably in the past decades, the social context is adverse to the viability of the language, since young speakers are most likely to move from Skolt Sámi area in search for employment (Feist, 2010). There are, though, also many positive factors such as awareness of issues related to the linguistic and cultural identity, available language resources etc. that give hope to Skolt Sámi language (Feist, 2010). The Orthodox Church as a linguistic arena and its possible contribution to better the prospects of the Skolt Sámi language will be discussed in this thesis.

(22)

12

1.5. Finnish Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Parish of Lapland

Most of the Skolt Sámi people are affiliated with Orthodox Christianity. Orthodox Christianity has around 270 million members around the world, making it the second biggest Christian Church in the world (Ortodoksinen kirkko, n.d.). The Orthodox Church of Finland is an autonomous archdiocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople (Ortodoksinen kirkko Suomessa, n.d.). The Orthodox Church of Finland has the status of a national church alongside the Evangelical Lutheran Church. The Finnish Orthodox Church was a part of the Russian Orthodox Church until 1923. Since then, the Orthodox Church of Finland has affiliated with Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople (Laitila, 2014).

The Orthodox Church of Finland has around 60,000 members and is divided into three dioceses – Diocese of Karelia, Diocese of Helsinki, and Diocese in Oulu – that consist of twenty-three parishes in the country (Ortodoksinen kirkko Suomessa, n.d.). One of them is also the Orthodox Parish of Lapland of which the Orthodox community of Sevettijärvi is a part.

The Orthodox Parish of Lapland has around 1,200 members. It was founded in 1950 as the northernmost Orthodox parish in Finland. Since 1980 the Orthodox Parish of Lapland belongs to the Diocese of Oulu (Leo, 1995). The main church of the Orthodox Parish of Lapland together with the church registry office (kirkkoherranvirasto in Finnish) is located in Rovaniemi. In the municipality of Inari, there are three other churches where services are held: in Ivalo, in Nellim, and in Sevettijärvi. Moreover, there is also a chapel in Keväjärvi. In the municipality of Inari, the majority of the members of the Orthodox Parish of Lapland are Skolt Sámi (Lapin ortodoksinen seurakunta, n.d.a).

The area of the Orthodox Parish of Lapland is extremely big as shown on the map below (Map 4). Needless to say, this is a challenge for the local Orthodox community. A travelling priest (matkapappi in Finnish), together with a cantor live in Ivalo, from where they travel to Sevettijärvi and Nellim to hold the religious services. Services in Sevettijärvi are thus held in average on a monthly basis. Services in Sevettijärvi are held in the local Orthodox church dedicated to St. Triphon that was built as a prayer house in 1950 and consecrated as a church in 1992 (Rantakeisu, 2015).

(23)

13

Map 4: Orthodox dioceses in Finland and parishes of the Diocese of Oulu.⁷

1.6. Skolt Sámi Orthodox religiosity and St. Triphon’s tradition

Before Christianization, Skolt Sámi practiced their traditional religion. However, in the 16^th century, in order to prevent spread of Lutheranism to the Kola Peninsula, the Russian Orthodox Church, with the support of the Russian state, sent missionaries to convert Sámi people. Among the first that brought Christianity to Sámi people on the Kola Peninsula were preachers such as Feodorit, Triphon and Feognost.

Triphon was especially instrumental, settling in Pechenga, founding a monastery there, and started preaching the gospel to the local Sámi population. Triphon is of substantial importance to the Skolt Sámi people. The legends that were written about him after his death are very much alive in the Skolt Sámi community and are a significant part of Skolt Sámi culture (Leo, 1995). Saint Triphon (1495-1583; in Skolt Sámi Pââˊss Treeffan), born as Mitrophan, is also called “Enlightener of the Sámi” (Saint Tryphon of Pechenga, n.d.). He is a

7 The map is scanned from Leo, 1995, p. 59.

(24)

14

central figure in the Skolt Sámi Orthodox legacy. As mentioned above, the church in Sevettijärvi is dedicated to Saint Triphon and the Orthodox Parish of Lapland embraces and honors the legacy of Saint Triphon in other ways as well.

According to the Orthodox tradition, Saint Triphon died on December 15^th 1583. This day is commemorated by the Orthodox community and especially by Skolt Sámi people. In Sevettijärvi, there is a special celebration in relation to Saint Triphon’s day, both in the church and also in school. This occasion always attracts a high attendance (Rantakeisu, 2015).

The Saint Triphon tradition is also acknowledged by the annual Saint Triphon pilgrimage that takes place the last weekend in August (Leo, 1995). This celebration has very high attendance not only by Skolt Sámi people or Orthodox people living in the Skolt Sámi area, but also Orthodox believers coming from other parts of Finland and even from Russia or Norway. The pilgrimage usually takes place in Keväjärvi, Sevettijärvi, Nellim and in Neiden on the Norwegian side. In 2015, I attended the pilgrimage, which was special since it was the 450^th year anniversary of St. George’s Chapel in Neiden. According to the Orthodox tradition it was founded by Saint Triphon.

As shown in the next chapter, a wide array of authors mention the importance of the Orthodox Church for Skolt Sámi people. The Orthodox Church has had an important role in the construction of Skolt Sámi identity and it is also an ethnic marker in Finland in contrast to other Sámi groups (Rantakeisu, 2015). I have already mentioned that Skolts often are called a

“minority within a minority”. This term can be used at more than an ethnical level, but also on a religious level, since the majority of Finns and even other Sámi groups belong to the Lutheran Church. My informants mentioned the Church as an important element of support during the difficult times during and after the World War II. Sergejeva (2000) also writes about the crucial role of the Orthodox religion during and after World War II as quoted in the very beginning of this chapter.

Nonetheless, the role of the Orthodox Church in Skolt Sámi lives has changed. Many Skolt Sámi have converted to the Lutheran Church, the Skolt Sámi community is more heterogeneous in the religious sense, and Orthodoxy is not directly connected to Skolt Sámi ethnicity. Rantakeisu (2015) writes the following:

Orthodoxy is not necessarily anymore considered to be the only typical Skolt Sámi religion – all the respondents mentioned that not being an Orthodox does not diminish one’s “Skoltness” (Rantakeisu, 2015, p. 99).

(25)

15

Even though nowadays the attendance at the services on a regular basis has decreased among the Skolt Sámi people and especially among young people, the role of the Orthodoxy is still considered an important part of the Skolt Sámi culture and heritage (Rantakeisu, 2015). One of my informants said the following:

(1)⁸ Orthodoxy is a part of our culture. However, Skolt Sámi are not considered to be religious, not by themselves, neither by outsiders. But the Orthodox Church is a part of our culture. The significance of the Church for the preservation of our culture until these days has been very remarkable. Without the Church, I cannot imagine how… Well, it is based on the fact that the Church gets people together and through this there has always been this sense of community (Tanja, 2015).

The Orthodox Church has been extremely important to the Skolt Sámi culture, history and identity and it still is, even though the Skolt Sámi religiosity has changed. Since the tie between Skolt Sámi people and the Orthodox Church has been so strong, I want to examine the Orthodox Church in Sevettijärvi as a language arena, and as a domain of language use.

8 I mark all the quotes from my informants by numbers presented in order of appearance, so that the Finnish original transcriptions are easy to find in the appendices. See the appendix “Original Finnish transcriptions of the interview quotes”. The process of transcription is discussed in 3.2.

(26)

16

(27)

17

2. THEORY

Religion is commonly overlooked in discussions on language revitalization, an ironic fact in that religious ceremonies and cultural activities imbued with spiritual value are often the last domains for a local language which is disappearing (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006, p. 43).

This chapter aims to present the theoretical framework of this Master’s thesis as well as previous research. First, previous research on the relationship between the Skolt Sámi people and the Orthodox Church will be presented, also showing the relevance of this study.

Subsequently, previous research on the relationship between language and religion will be presented in order to place this study within a larger scientific context. The last part of this chapter will be devoted to a short description of the key concepts of this Master’s thesis, and thus the concept of domains of language use and other related theoretical terms.

2.1. Previous research on the relationship between Skolt Sámi people and the Orthodox Church and relevance of this study

Even though the Skolt Sámi community accounts for a small population, there have been many studies dealing with the issues of Skolt Sámi revitalization, regarding both cultural and linguistic issues. Yet these studies mention the relationship between Skolt Sámi language and religion only on a marginal level. I have found it very interesting when reading different studies and articles dealing with the Skolt Sámi cultural and language revitalization that authors such as Linkola (1996), Jefremoff (2005), Lehtola (2004a), Sergejeva (2000), Leo (1995), Rantakeisu (2015) and others repeatedly express the importance of the Finnish Orthodox Church in everyday life of Skolt Sámi.

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the Church was an important element of support for the Skolt Sámi and their culture especially during the difficult times during and after World War II.

Orthodoxy has no doubt meant to the Skolt Sámi more than merely religion, since it also has meant an endeavour by them to preserve their own roots in the alien environment. [...] Attempting to preserve themselves as an ethnically internal group, the Skolt Sámi intuitively looked to their Orthodox faith, which distinguished them from the majority population, as did their language. The Church still means a great deal to the Skolt Sámi as a preserver of their culture (Sergejeva, 2000, p. 26).

(28)

18

As the quote above shows, the Church was a unifying element for the Skolt Sámi community.

One informant in Jefremoff's (2005) study expresses his or her opinion on the Finnish Orthodox Church as follows:

Orthodoxy is the strongest element for supporting the culture. The Orthodox Church has supported the Skolt Sámi culture and it deserves a great gratitude for that (Jefremoff, 2005, p. 68, my translation from Finnish).⁹

As shown above, Jefremoff (2005) similarly emphasizes the Church as a supportive force for the Skolt Sámi culture. Linkola & Linkola (2000) then state that the Skolt Sámi language and the Orthodox Church are considered to be the symbols of the Skolt Sámi identity.

An informant in Rantakeisu's (2015) Master’s thesis is of the same opinion about the Finnish Orthodox Church and mentions also its importance regarding the language: “But it [the church] does support [the culture] ... And it has also developed the language. And is involved in the language work. People hear Skolt language at church” (Rantakeisu, 2015, p.

45). These quotes show that to the Skolt Sámi Orthodoxy is more than merely a religion, for them it is also a marker of their identity and an important supportive element for the preservation of their culture.

Nevertheless, so far no studies have elaborated on the issue of the Finnish Orthodox Church being a domain of language use and its relationship towards Skolt Sámi language.

This lack of research and implications of the connection between the Finnish Orthodox Church and language revitalization sparked my interest in exploring this topic further. Before beginning fieldwork, studying the above mentioned literature and also other research gave me some useful background information about the Skolt Sámi history, culture, language and society, as well as the historical context for the relationship between the Orthodox Church and Skolt Sámi people. I very briefly present some of the texts dealing with Skolt Sámi issues that have also connection to my thesis. I present these texts chronologically.

In 1995, an article written by Metropolitan Leo was included in a book dealing with issues of ethnic minorities such as Skolt Sámi people, Karelians and Setos. Metropolitan Leo's article entitled Kolttien uskontoelämän historia ja nykytila (in English The life and the contemporary situation of the Skolt Sámi religious life) gives a short account on the history of

9 Original Finnish text: Ortodoksisuus on vahvin kulttuuria kantava voima. Ortodoksinen kirkko on tukenut kolttakulttuuria ja ansaitsee siitä suuren kiitoksen.

(29)

19

Orthodoxy among Skolt Sámi people. It is a good overview of the historical context, important Orthodox holidays celebrated by Skolt Sámi people, the importance of St. Triphon, and basic information about Orthodox Parish of Lapland, language issues, religious literature etc.

In 1996, Anni Linkola wrote her Master’s thesis entitled Koltansaamen nykytilanne vähemmistökielenä Suomessa (in English The contemporary situation of Skolt Sámi language as a minority language in Finland). This thesis is a valuable source of information about Skolt Sámi bilingualism and the Skolt Sámi language situation, and some of the quotes from Linkola’s informants are especially interesting. They mention the close connection between language and religion many times. Interestingly, she also mentions the term domains, although, when she writes about “Domains of oral Skolt Sámi” (Linkola, 1996, pp. 114-115) (in Finnish Koltan puhumisen domainit), she focuses upon home, relatives, friends and work, but she overlooks religion.

As Rantakeisu (2015) mentions, it is Jelena Porsanger who is perhaps a pioneer within the research on the Skolt Sámi religion. Porsanger has studied the Eastern Sámi traditions, religion and history, indigenous methodologies and other related issues. In 2000 she wrote an article entitled The Eastern Sámi: A short account of their history and identity (Sergejeva, 2000). In this article, she gives information about the historical milestones for the Eastern Sámi, thus also Skolt Sámi, from olden times up until the end of 20th century. She also discusses the relationship between the Sámi and the Orthodox Church.

In 2005, Irja Jefremoff published Kolttasaamelaiset: tutkimus kotoutetun kansan elämäntilanteesta uuden vuosituhannen alussa (in English Skolt Sámi people: research on an acculturated nation's life situation at the beginning of the new millennium). This research is very special and valuable since it was initiated by the Skolt Sámi themselves - by local Skolt Sámi political structures. The aim of this work is to gain information about Skolt Sámi needs, hopes and opinions. It deals with various topics, such as the economic situation, education, Skolt Sámi language and culture etc.

In 2015, Mira Rantakeisu wrote her Master’s thesis entitled Cultivating a Sense of Belonging - The Orthodox Church as a Part of the Collective Memory of Skolt Sámi in Finland. This Master’s thesis examines the role of the Orthodox Church in the Skolt Sámi culture and presents also generational differences in religiosity.

Even though research dealing with the relationship between the Orthodox Church and Skolt Sámi people is sparse, it has recently increased as shown in the Master’s thesis by Mira

(30)

20

Rantakeisu. At the same time, the Finnish Academy has launched a research project called Embodied religion. Changing Meanings of Body and Gender in Contemporary Forms of Religious Identity in Finland (Faculty of Theology, University of Helsinki). This project started in 2013 and should be finished in 2017 (Embodied Religion, n.d.). Elina Vuola, manager of the project, focused in her field work on Orthodox Skolt women and their relationship and perceptions of the Virgin Mary (Rantakeisu, 2015).

My Master’s thesis aims to contribute to the growing interest in the relationship between the Orthodox Church and the Skolt Sámi people, and to enrich this field by discussing the interaction between the Orthodox Church and Skolt Sámi language.

2.2. Previous research on the relationship between language and religion

The question of the relationship between the Finnish Orthodox Church and the Skolt Sámi language brought me to inquire about the relationship between language and religion in general. Surprisingly, there is also very little literature to be found on this topic. Sawyer (2001a) writes the following in the opening chapter of Concise Encyclopedia of Language and Religion: “Language and religion share a very long and a very close history and it is perhaps surprising that this Concise Encyclopedia of Language and Religion is first of its kind”¹⁰ (Sawyer, 2001a, p. 1).

The interaction between language and religion occurs on many various levels and can be explored from many different perspectives. Language and religion have influenced each other immensely from time immemorial. Therefore, it is remarkable that the field that deals with the topic of language and religion in particular is relatively new and unexplored.

However, the link between the spread of religion and the spread of language is inevitable (Ferguson, 1982). Omoniyi (2006, p. 363) writes that “multilingualism is both a cause and an effect of the spread of religion”. “The topic of ‘language and religion’ is relatively new to sociolinguistics and the systematic development of it as a field of sociolinguistic study only really started to come about in the past decade” (Darquennes & Vandenbussche, 2011, p. 1).

This quote shows how young and unanchored this field is. The development of the field is clearly presented in the articles Religion as a Site of Language Contact by Spolsky (2003) and

10 It is also worth noting that both religion and language are important markers of ethnonational identity (Safran, 2008). The topic of language, religion and identity is discussed by Safran (2008) and Edwards (2009).

(31)

21

Language and religion as a sociolinguistic field of study: some introductory notes by Darquennes & Vandenbussche (2011). I will present just some major contributions to the field of sociology of language and religion so far.

One of the very few scholars that expressed the importance of the interactions between religion and language was Charles Ferguson, one of the founders of the modern sociology of language. His text from 1982 is, as Spolsky states, “probably the basic text on the relationship between religious and linguistic writing systems,” (Spolsky, 2003, p. 82). Ferguson shows that the distribution of major writing systems in the world is in close relationship with the distribution of the world's major religions, which is largely a result of the fact that a spread of a major religion also introduced the use of writing into non-literate communities (Ferguson, 1982). He also draws attention to the intersection of missionary activities and colonization.

Furthermore, Ferguson argues that “indirect relation between spread of writing systems gives some indication of the indirect relation between religion and the spread of languages in general” (Ferguson, 1982, p. 96). Ferguson discusses different attitudes of religions towards translations of sacred texts. He assumes “that all religious belief systems include some beliefs about language” (Ferguson, 1982, p. 103). Ferguson also shows how religion plays an important role in language maintenance and language shift and describes how language preferences for corporate worship, religious teaching, or public interaction affects language maintenance and language shift.

Another great contribution to the study of the relationship between language and religion is the above mentioned Concise Encyclopedia of Language and Religion (2001). This work is divided into six main sections: 1) language in the context of particular religions, 2) sacred texts and translations, 3) religious languages and scripts, 4) special language uses (for example blessings, curses, prayers, meditation etc.), 5) beliefs about language (for example magical power of names, biblical story of the Tower of Bable etc.) and 6) religion and the study of language. The articles deal with various and quite specific topics, although, as Spolsky (2003, p. 81) underlines, “none deals with bilingualism or multilingualism or language contact or language policy and planning, nor do these terms appear in the extensive index”.

In 2006, Joshua Fishman and Tope Omoniyi edited a volume entitled Explorations in the Sociology of Language and Religion that consists of specific studies dealing with interactions between language and religion. Spolsky (2006) suggested the following thematic

(32)

22

structure for this work that is summarized and described in Darquennes & Vandenbussche (2011):

1. Effects of religion on language: Possible research topics include the influence of religion on language choice, language maintenance as well as (lexical) borrowing.

2. The mutuality of language and religion: Research within this dimension deals, for example, with the interplay between religions and languages in the changing sociolinguistic repertoire of multilingual towns. At stake here is the interaction between multilingualism and religious pluralism.

3. Effects of language on religion: A possible focus of study is the contribution of language (such as used in prayer, e.g.) to building a religious community.

4. Language, religion and literacy: Research within this dimension looks, for example, at the influence of language and religion on literacy (Darquennes & Vandenbussche, 2011, p. 4).

Spolsky provides another possible framework for the study of language and religion. This outline clearly reflects a different sociolinguistic perspective from the thematic division of Concise Encyclopedia of Language and Religion. However, Spolsky, (2006, p. 7) writing about his own classification admits that such “organization may be parsimonious [...], but it is not terribly revealing, for it is no more than a grouping”. Therefore, Fishman’s (2006) opening of his article A Decalogue of basic theoretical perspectives for a sociology of language and religion is: “With respect to basic theory, we stand now in the sociology of language and religion just about where we were relative to the sociology of language per se some 40 or more years ago” (Fishman, 2006, p. 13). Fishman (Ibid.) therefore encourages researchers to find “a theoretical parental home” for the new field of sociology of language and religion. It seems that this attempt to find “a theoretical parental home” has become so far the most promising and stays central in the sociology of language and religion research community.¹¹ Nevertheless, Fishman himself concludes his decalogue with the following words: “These propositions need to be fleshed out, modified, selectively abandoned or added to in order that a theoretically anchored and empirically supported sociology of language and religion can ultimately develop” (Fishman, 2006, p. 24).

Even though scholars now show more interest in the interactions between language and religion, and the field of sociology of language and religion is developing, well- established theoretical principles are still absent. This fact led me to the decision to use

11 The international academic community of sociology of language and religion has a webpage:

www.sociologyoflanguageandreligion.com.

(33)

23

theoretical elements from this developing field, but to build my analysis on a well-established theoretical concept of domains of language use.

2.3. The concept of domains of language use

The concept of domains of language use was launched by Joshua Fishman. The first person who proposed the idea of domains was Schmidt-Rohr in the 1930’s (Fishman, 1972a). He recommended the following nine domains in order to describe dominance configurations in bilingual settings: the family, the playground and street, the school (subdivided into language of instruction, subject of instruction, and language of recess and entertainment), the church, literature, the press, the military, the courts, and the governmental administration (Fishman, 1965). Subsequently, other researchers either added or removed some domains in their analytical approaches to particular multilingual settings.

Joshua Fishman developed the concept in 1972 recommending five domains: family, friendship, religion, education and employment¹² (Fishman, 1972a). However, “domains are defined, regardless of their number, in terms of institutional contexts and their congruent behavioural co-occurrences. They attempt to summate the major clusters of interaction that occur in clusters of multilingual settings and involving clusters of interlocutors” (Fishman, 1972a, p. 441). Domains of language use are not universal and need to be defined according to the sociocultural context. Still, this concept helps us understand who speaks what language to whom and when in multilingual settings. It also helps us to understand why people speak that language in certain situations with certain people instead of others. It deals primarily with

“within-group (or intragroup) multilingualism” rather than with “between-group or intergroup multilingualism”. Thus, it deals with multilingual settings in which one single population speaks two or more languages. In such settings “only one of theoretically co-available languages will be chosen by particular classes of interlocutors on particular occasions”

(Fishman, 1972a, p. 437).

Fishman describes three main factors influencing language choice: group, situation and topic. The first factor is group membership (age, sex, race, religion etc.). Fishman gives a hypothetical example of a government functionary in Brussels generally speaking standard French in his office, standard Dutch at his club, and a distinctly local variant of Flemish at home (Fishman 1972a, p. 438). He uses different languages on different occasions according

12 Work-sphere as a domain was overlooked by Schmidt-Rohr (Fishman, 1972a).

(34)

24

to which group he wants to identify with on particular occasions. Another factor is situation.

As Fishman argues, “certain languages [...] are considered by particular interlocutors to be an indicator of greater intimacy, informality, equality, etc.” (Fishman, 1965, p. 70). As a result, one of the languages is more likely to be used for certain situations than the other. The third factor is topic. Certain topics are handled better in one language than in another, due to different causes (Fishman, 1965).

As Fishman suggests, individual language choices relate to widespread sociocultural norms and expectations. If many individuals tend to handle a certain topic in a certain language, it may be because the topic pertains to a domain in which that language is

“dominant” for their society or for their sub-group (Fishman, 1965). Fishman (1972b) states the factors influencing domains are topic, role-relation and locale. Topic, as described above, regulates language use according to which topics interlocutors are used to handle in which language. In the religious domain, it might be sermons, prayers, confessions, and social topics (Spolsky, 1998). Role-relation also influences language choice. For example, Fishman writes that the religious domain may reveal such role relations as cleric-cleric, cleric-parishioner, parishioner-cleric and parishioner-parishioner (Fishman, 1972b). In different role-relations people might choose different languages. Also locale, or the place where the conversations take place, influences language choice. In a religious setting, the locale is often a church, for example.

Ultimately, as Fishman writes, “[l]anguage choices cumulate over many individuals and many choice instances, become transformed into the processes of language maintenance or language shift”¹³ (Fishman, 1965, p. 71). The domain concept has helped to organize and clarify the processes of language maintenance and language shift by revealing certain patterns of language use in different domains.

As describe above, domains of language use are directly dependent on the sociocultural context and thus need to be adjusted to it. The constitution of individual domains in given societies are not universal, even though the theoretical concept helps us to understand larger patterns in language choice and their related phenomena in multilingual settings.

As mentioned earlier in 2.1., Linkola (1996, pp. 114-115) references home, relatives, friends and work as “Domains of oral Skolt Sámi” (in Finnish Koltan puhumisen domainit), but she overlooks religion. I will not try to establish all the domains of Skolt Sámi language use in Sevettijärvi, but let us suppose that we can use the division that Fishman proposed in

13 These terms are explained in section 2.5. Key concepts and terms.

(35)

25

1972: family, friendship, religion, education and employment (Fishman, 1972a). In this thesis, I focus only on the domain of religion, even though the boundaries of this domain are very ambiguous, as will be shown later on. I now explain how I understand and use the concept domain of language use in the context of the Finnish Orthodox Church within the community of Sevettijärvi.

Many sociolinguists constitute religion as one single domain of language use. In the context of my thesis, it would be inaccurate to refer to the Finnish Orthodox Church as the entire religious domain of Skolt Sámi language use in Sevettijärvi. Even though the majority of the local population has an Orthodox religious affiliation, at least one other religious group makes up a big number of the population and its percentage increases, namely the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. Therefore, the Finnish Orthodox Church could be defined as a subdomain within the religion domain of language use, but for the sake of simplicity, I will refer to the Finnish Orthodox Church as a single domain, and the Finnish Orthodox Church as a domain of language use. In many cases, the domain of the Finnish Orthodox Church overlaps or penetrates other domains, such as family, friends, education or media as shown in the next chapters.

2.4. Religion as a domain of language use and its role in language revitalization

Language revitalization, or what Fishman (1991) calls reversing language shift, aims to increase the number of speakers of a particular language and extend the domains where it is employed (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006). Thus, it is a large process of social, cultural and political changes that occur in a large number of domains across the society, as mentioned in the introduction. Use of a language in fewer domains is a sign of the lessening vitality of the language. On the other hand, if a language is used in a higher number of domains, it is a sign of strengthening the language vitality (Grenoble & Whaley, 2006).

There have been different studies assessing language vitality, among others a document by UNESCO entitled Language vitality and endangerment (Brenzinger et al., 2003) listing nine different factors of language vitality. However, I want to present here a taxonomy developed by Hyltenstam & Stroud (1991) describing factors influencing language shift and language maintenance. Subsequently, I will present a taxonomy of the structural variables affecting ethnolinguistic vitality by Giles (1977).

(36)

26

I. FACTORS AT THE SOCIETAL LEVEL a) Political-legal conditions

b) Ideology of the majority society c) Implementation [of minority legislation]

d) Economic conditions

Industrialisation/urbanisation Majority enterprises

Communications Labor market

e) [Visibility of] sociocultural norms [in majority society]

f) Education

II. FACTORS AT THE GROUP LEVEL g) Demography

Size

Geographical distribution Migration

Age distribution Sex distribution Degree of endogamy h) Language characteristics

Official language

Official language in another country

Spoken language in more than one [country]

Dialect or language split Standardisation/modernisation Degree of bilingualism Proficiencies in each language View of language [prestige & purism]

i) Heterogeneity/homogeneity j) Niches of subsistence/religion

k) Type of ethnicity [e.g. ethnic nationalism]

l) Internal organisation [e.g. charismatic leadership]

m) Institutions Education Religion

Language planning Research

Culture n) Media

(37)

27

o) Culture

III. FACTORS AT THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL p) Language choice

q) Socialisation

Figure 3: A taxonomy of factors influencing language maintenance for minority languages developed by Hyltenstam & Stroud (1991, p. 112).¹⁴

Figure 4: A taxonomy of the structural variables affecting ethnolinguistic vitality.¹⁵

These taxonomies show a bigger picture of various and complex factors affecting language shift, language maintenance, and language vitality. Institutional support is one of the important factors that a language can receive on national, regional or community levels (Giles 1977; Hyltenstam & Stroud, 1991). This thesis deals with the institution of the Finnish Orthodox Church on a local level of the community in Sevettijärvi.

14I use the English translation from Swedish of this taxonomy as used in Musk (p. 69, n.d.).

15 In Giles, 1977, p. 309.

God speaks Skolt Sámi as well. Finnish Orthodox Church as a domain of language use among the Skolt Sámi in Sevettijärvi

God Speaks Skolt Sámi as Well

God Speaks Skolt Sámi as Well

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements

Abstract

List of maps and figures

1. INTRODUCTION

2. THEORY